To this day, the church has been getting the same response from the city: Sorry, you’re not zoned for a house of worship.

The church sued the city and has been in litigation in federal court to get that industrial building. Whatever the outcome of the situation, it should be one for the history books because never in the history of San Leandro has there been a church that wanted to move into the industrial area of town.

So I thought it would be nice to provide a timeline of the series of events that have transpired since the church first began its quest.

Here’s what has happened:

2005: Church leaders realize the congregation at Faith Fellowship has swarmed to more than 1,500 weekly attendees and that the church has outgrown its sanctuary at 577 Manor Blvd.

May 19, 2006: The city receives an application from Faith Fellowship to rezone the former MDL building, which has sat vacant for months, after church leaders meet briefly with city officials to discuss buying the property.

January 2007: Faith Fellowship purchases the former MDL building.

March 19, 2007: The City Council approves a newly created assembly overlay district, which rezones 13 potential sites in commercial and industrial zones comprising 197 properties throughout the city. Faith Fellowship is not included in the overlay district.

May 1, 2007: The assembly overlay district goes into effect.

April 12, 2007: Faith Fellowship’s rezoning application is heard by the Planning Commission and denied.

May 7, 2007: Faith Fellowship appeals the Planning Commission’s decision to the City Council. The denial is upheld.

July 12, 2007: Faith Fellowship sues the city in federal court, claiming the city’s denial of the church’s rezoning application violates the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). The church asks for a preliminary injunction allowing it to occupy the industrial building it purchased.

Dec. 6, 2007: The Board of Zoning Adjustments holds a public hearing after Faith Fellowship submits a conditional use permit to the city to allow the church to move into the former MDL building. This time, on the grounds it operates “entertainment activities,” a legality in the city’s zoning code that says assembly uses are allowed in industrial areas. The conditional use permit is denied.

About 400 potential voters were surveyed in the district’s study, and district staff have little to no room for error if they want to pass a successful bond, according to the study.

But judging from our own independent HayWord survey, the district may have its work cut out for it.

Results from our survey show 82 percent of bloggers indicated they would not support a facilities measure. Take note, however, that only 67 voters participated in our online survey.

If the HayWord is Ms. Cleo and can predict the future, then what should the district do?

Drive around your neighborhood. Are you happy with how your schools look?

How about a parcel tax? Teachers’ union leaders have said they would prefer that the district pursue a parcel tax to increase salaries and improve the interior of schools before beautifying exterior facilities.

What are your thoughts on such an idea, and would you support a parcel tax if it were to go towards teacher salaries, school supplies, district programs and so on?